Yes, this is a misrepresentation. Both committees work together to ensure that the repertoire is identical.
âMark ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Ewell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Unicode Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Philippe Verdy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 13:59 Subject: Relationship between Unicode and 10646 (was: Re: Shift-JIS conversion.) > Philippe Verdy <verdy underscore p at wanadoo dot fr> wrote: > > >> UTF-8 is an encoding of the Unicode character set. > > > > More exactly, UTF-8 is an encoding of the ISO/IEC 10646 character > > set... > > > > Unicode by itself is not a character set, only an implementation of > > the ISO/IEC 10646 character set... > > > > Of course the Unicode technical commitee may propose new assignments > > to ISO/IEC, but this is still ISO/IEC 10646 which maintains the > > repertoire and approves or rejects the proposals. A new character > > proposal may be rejected by Unicode, but accepted by ISO/IEC 10646; > > and it is the ISO/IEC 10646 vote that prevails (so Unicode will have > > to accept this ISO/IEC decision, even if it has voted against it in a > > prior decision). > > I'd have to defer to the actual UTC and WG2 members, but my feeling is > that this badly misrepresents the relationship between Unicode and > 10646, and between their respective standardization bodies. > > My impression is that Unicode and ISO/IEC 10646 are two distinct > standards, administered respectively by UTC and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2, > which have pledged to work together to keep the standards perfectly > aligned and interoperable, because it would be destructive to both > standards to do otherwise. I don't think of it at all as the "slave and > master" relationship Philippe describes. > > -Doug Ewell > Fullerton, California > http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ > > > >
